MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W7088629883 · doi:10.1016/j.lindif.2025.102805

Defining external regulation on standardized test instructions: A key variable for the academic success of students in the digital world

2025· article· en· W7088629883 sur OpenAlex

Pourquoi ce travail est dans la base

Une base qui oublie comment elle a trouvé un travail ne peut pas être vérifiée. Voici les voies qui ont admis celui-ci.

affAu moins un auteur déclare une institution canadienne dans l'instantané OpenAlex épinglé.
fundUn bailleur canadien est enregistré sur le travail.

Notice bibliographique

RevueLearning and Individual Differences · 2025
Typearticle
Langueen
DomainePhysics and Astronomy
ThématiqueMechanical and Optical Resonators
Établissements canadiensYork University
Organismes subventionnairesSocial Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada
Mots-clésOperationalizationTest (biology)Set (abstract data type)Standardized testContext (archaeology)CognitionCoding (social sciences)Point (geometry)Key (lock)

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Determining the degree of external regulation by educators in the increasing digitalization of the school context is one of the most important issues we are facing in the future of students' learning. Educators must determine how to set up the learning environment and amount of direction provided to elicit their student's best performance. Standardized test assessments of cognitive abilities provide an important reference point for operationalizing how degree of examiner structure and direction during the administration of these tests may be related to individual differences in student performance. Our analysis of standardized instructions of several different measures of cognitive assessments illustrates how these assessments vary in their degree of external regulation, such as specifications of set up of physical environment, amount of instruction and feedback provided, examiner direction during administration and timing factors. Based on a coding scheme to identify and quantify these factors, we present a proof of concept by examining whether degree of external regulation may explain individual differences in test performance, particularly in at-risk learners such as child and youth with ADHD. Operationalizing what we have learned from years of refining instructions for standardized test administration can serve as a useful reference point for determining factors to optimize student learning within the digitalization of learning environments. This paper discusses the importance of the environment (more specifically, the testing environment) for students' success, particularly at-risk learners such as students with ADHD. To illustrate how environmental structure can impact student performance, instructions for standardized test assessments of cognitive skills were used to show how environmental structure can be operationalized in learning environments. Standardized test assessments of cognitive abilities provide an important reference point for operationalizing how degree of examiner structure and direction during the administration of these tests is related to individual differences in student performance. In this paper, we surveyed the instructions of some of the most common standardized assessments of cognitive abilities (intelligence and executive function tasks) to operationalize the types and degree of structure provided as part of the instructions and administration of these tests. Then, we identified illustrative studies to demonstrate how the nature and amount of examiner direction may explain individual differences in test performance, particularly in at-risk learners such as students with ADHD. Finally, the relevance for at-risk learners in online learning environments is discussed, given that this environment may be particularly challenging for educators to control and regulate to optimize learners' success. • Educators must determine how to set up the learning environment and amount of direction provided to elicit their students' best performance. • Common standardized assessments of cognitive abilities vary in their degree of structure. • High structure tests will require less internal regulation from the examinee. • At-risk learners require more external regulation to elevate their performances.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Prédiction distillée sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,000
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Observationnel · Signal consensuel: Observationnel
GenreSignal candidat: Empirique · Signal consensuel: Empirique
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,205
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,172

Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0000,000
Bibliométrie0,0000,000
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0000,000
Communication savante0,0000,000
Science ouverte0,0000,000
Intégrité de la recherche0,0000,000
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0000,000

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,017
Tête enseignante GPT0,301
Écart entre enseignants0,284 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle